July 2008 1

AFRICA RISING - Enhancing partnership among

Africa RISING, NAFAKA and TUBORESHE

CHAKULA Programs for fast tracking delivery and

scaling of agricultural technologies in Tanzania Annual Report 01 October 2016 – 30 September 2017

Submission Date: 30 October 2017

Contract/Agreement No: BFS-G-11-00002

Activity Start Date and End Date: 01 October 2014 to 30 September 2017

COR/AOR Name: Elizabeth Maeda

Submitted by: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture

IITA Headquarters,

PMB 5320, Oyo Road, Ibadan 20000,1

Oyo State, Nigeria.

Tel: +234 700800IITA, +1 201 6336094

This document was produced for review by the United States Agency for International

Development/Tanzania (USAID/Tanzania).

1

Contents

I. Activity Overview/Summary ...................................................................................3

1.1 Executive summary .................................................................................................................. 3

1.2 Summary of results to date .................................................................................................... 6

1.3 Evaluation/assessment status and/or plan ........................................................................... 7

2. ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS .................................................................8

2.1 Progress narrative .................................................................................................................... 8

2.2 Implementation status and planned activities ..................................................................... 9

2.2.1 Maize/legume technologies and management practices ................................................... 9

2.2.2 Rice technologies and management practices .................................................................. 15

2.2.3 Vegetable technologies and management practices ........................................................ 17

2.2.4 Postharvest and aflatoxin management ............................................................................. 18

2.2.5 Field days and related events ............................................................................................... 19

2.2.6 Problems and challenges ....................................................................................................... 21

2.2.7 Planned activities ..................................................................................................................... 22

3. INTEGRATION OF CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES and USAID FORWARD PRIORITIES ...... 23

3.1 Gender equality and women’s empowerment................................................................. 23

3.2 Youth engagement ..................................................................................................................... 23

3.3 Local capacity development ................................................................................................. 24

3.4 Integration and collaboration ............................................................................................... 24

3.5 Sustainability ............................................................................................................................ 24

3.6 Environmental compliance .................................................................................................... 26

3.7 Global climate change ............................................................................................................ 26

3.8 Policy and governance support ........................................................................................... 26

3.9 Private sector engagement, Public Private Partnerships (PPP), and Global Development

Alliance (GDA) collaboration .............................................................................................. 26

3.10 Science, technology, and innovation ................................................................................... 27

4. STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION AND INVOLVEMENT ............................................ 27

5. MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES ..................................................... 27

6. MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND LEARNING ....................................................... 28

7. ANNEXES .............................................................................................................. 31

2

7.1 Annex I: Performance against PMP indicators for Project Year III (2016/17) .......... 31

7.2 Annex II: Success stories ...................................................................................................... 35

Cover photo

A QDS rice farmer in Kilombero District inspecting his rice crop. Photo credit: Filbert

Mzee/ACDI VOCA.

3

I. ACTIVITY OVERVIEW/SUMMARY

Activity Name:

AFRICA RISING- Enhancing partnership among Africa RISING, NAFAKA,

and TUBORESHE CHAKULA Programs for fast tracking delivery and

scaling of agricultural technologies in Tanzania

Activity Start Date: 1 October 2014

Activity End Date: 30 September 2017

Name of Prime

Implementing Partner:

International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA)

Contract/Agreement

Number:

BFS-G-11-00002

Name of Subcontractors/Sub

awardees:

Agricultural Research Institute, Dakawa/Chollima

International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT)

World Vegetable Center (WorldVeg)

Major Counterpart

Organizations

International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT)

World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF)

Agricultural Research Institute, Hombolo

Agricultural Research Institute, Selian

Kilombero Agricultural Research and Training Institute (KATRIN)

Horticultural Research and Training Institute (HORTI)-Tengeru

District Agricultural Councils

Meru Agro-seed Company and Consultancy

Aminata Agro-seed company

Geographic Coverage

(districts, regions, and/or

Zanzibar)

Babati and Kiteto districts (Manyara Region)

Kongwa District (Dodoma Region)

Kilombero, Ifakara, Kilosa, and Mvomero districts (Morogoro Region)

Iringa rural and Kilolo districts (Iringa Region)

Mbarali and Mbeya Rural districts (Mbeya Region)

Mbozi District (Songwe Region)

Reporting Period: 01 October 2016 to 30 September 2017

1.1 Executive summary

The Africa RISING-NAFAKA partnership project focuses on the delivery and scaling of

promising interventions that enhance agricultural productivity in Tanzania. The key

interventions include introduction of improved crop varieties, dissemination of best-bet crop

management packages, rehabilitation and protection of natural resources, and reduction of food

waste and spoilage. The project focus is on three crop enterprises —maize, rice, and

vegetables— with postharvest handling and nutrition as a cross-cutting theme. Legumes are also

promoted as a means of better natural resource management and improving nutrition. The key

partners in the project are international agricultural research centers and one USAID-funded

4

project under the Feed the Future (FtF) Initiative in Tanzania —NAFAKA. These work in

partnership with national agricultural research institutions as well as local government

authorities, the private sector (seed companies, millers, and processors), and nongovernmental

organizations (NGOs) to deliver on the strategic objective of increasing the productivity of key

value chains in Tanzania.

During the past year, project activities were implemented in the regions of Dodoma, Iringa,

Manyara, Mbeya, and Morogoro, all in the FtF’s Zone of Influence (ZoI). Project activities

implemented in 221 villages located in ten districts included: (i) the establishment of 300

mother demonstration plots (200 for maize/legumes, 57 for rice, and 43 for vegetables) and

2,444 baby demos (1,558 for maize/legumes, 842 for rice, and 44 for vegetables) for improved

crop varieties—the demonstration sites act as learning sites for farmers; (ii) support to

production of quality declared seeds for legumes (67 farmers planting 81 acres) and rice (67

farmers); (iii) training extension staff and farmers on Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs); (iv)

promotion and training on natural resource management practices. Key natural resource

management technologies were integration of legumes with maize, use of tied ridges and rippers to manage soil and water resources especially in semi-arid locations, management of

salt-affected and calcareous soils and alternate wet and dry water management in rice; (v)

postharvest and aflatoxin management activities focusing on mechanized maize shelling to

reduce drudgery and enhance proper storage; management of aflatoxin in maize; and training

local artisans to provide after-sales and maintenance services for machinery.

All the promoted improved crop varieties performed better than local varieties. However, the

improved varieties did not perform to their potential owing to poor rains in some locations and

flooding in others. For maize, yields of between 2 and 6.5 t/ha were reported for improved

varieties and recommended agronomic practices, depending on variety, practices used and

agroecology – yields for maize in semi-arid locations were lower than in other locations.

However, in all cases, yields of improved varieties combined with good agricultural practices

were higher than for local varieties and with farmer practices. For rice, yields of 6.6 t/ha for

Komboka and 5.1 t/ha for TXD 306 were attained under good agricultural practices, compared

to 4.3 t/ha for a local variety under farmer practices. For salt-tolerant varieties, yields of 10.3

t/ha (SATO6) and 10.2 t/ha (SATO1) were realized under good management compared to 5.1

t/ha with no management.

The project trained 192 Government extension staff who facilitated access to technologies by

at least 51,000 (farmers applying at least one technology introduced by the project (the total

number of beneficiaries reached by the project was 52,093). With these numbers, the project

realized all its targets for the project year. This achievement was attributed to pro-active

project design whereby we intensely engaged with local Government extension staff and

Village-based Agricultural Agents (VBAAs) who did an excellent job of training farmers. Linking

farmers to the rural agro-dealer network also contributed immensely to timely access to agro-

inputs.

The key challenges faced by the project during the reporting period were (i) fall armyworm; (ii)

unfavorable weather (poor rains, flooding); and (iii) delays by the Government of Tanzania in

5

getting approval and registration of the Aflasafe product for aflatoxin management stifled efforts

to take the product to scale despite the interest it had aroused among farmers. The budget for

the reporting period was US$ 2,000,000 and the actual expenditures are reported separately by

IITA every three months.

6

1.2 Summary of results to date

Indicators

List all indicators per IR and indicate in brackets whether it

is a standard or custom indicator. Indicator definitions

should go in the Annex.

Q1

FY16/17

Q2

FY16/17

Q3

FY16/17

Q4

FY16/17

Achievements

FY 16/17

Percentage

Achieved FY17 (%)

LOP

Target

LOP

Achievements to Date

LOP Percentage

Achieved (%)

EG.3-1: (4.5.2-13) Number of

households benefiting directly from USG

interventions (RAA)

9,255 36,126 13,046 1,833 49,172 104.6% 47,000 52,093 110.8%

EG.3.2-1: (4.5.2-7) Number of individuals who have received USG-supported

short-term agricultural sector productivity or food

security training (RAA) (WOG)

2,526 42,364 18,722

2,618 61,086 129.4% 47,200 61,524 130.3%

EG.3.2-4: (4.5.2-11) Number of for-profit private

enterprises, producers’ organizations, water users’

associations, women's groups, trade and business

associations, and community-based organizations (CBOs)

receiving USG food security-related organizational

development assistance (RAA) (WOG)

179 196 231 231 231 115.5% 200 231 115.5%

*EG.3.2-17: (4.5.2-5) Number of farmers and others who

have applied improved technologies or management

practices with USG

51,505 109.6% 47,000 51,724 110%

7

assistance (RAA) (WOG)

*EG.3.2-18: (4.5.2-2) Number of ha of land under improved

technologies or management practices with USG

assistance (RAA) (WOG)

93,975 162% 58,000 94,041 162.1%

1.3 Evaluation/assessment status and/or plan

Assessment Type Planned for (date) Status

Data quality assessment August 2017 Completed

Project annual outcome survey August – September 2017 Completed

8

2. ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS

2.1 Progress narrative

Africa RISING and our partners are involved in the delivery of agricultural information and

technology packages through a network of projects and other public and private sector

actors that include NAFAKA, the USAID-funded cereals program. These collaborations are

aimed at improving efficiency while contributing to the Feed the Future (FtF) goals of

harmonizing regional efforts to fight hunger and poverty in countries with chronic food

insecurity and insufficient production of staple crops. Attractive interventions in this project

include the introduction of improved crop varieties, dissemination of good agricultural

practices (GAPs), rehabilitation and protection of natural resources, and postharvest

management.

The project focuses on four crop enterprises (maize, legumes, rice, and vegetables) with

postharvest handling and nutrition as cross-cutting themes. The key partners in the project

include international agricultural research centers: IITA, CIMMYT, CIAT, ICRAF, the World

Vegetable Center, and one USAID-funded cereal crops project: NAFAKA (ACDI/VOCA).

These work in partnership with national agricultural research institutions (ARIs) such as

Dakawa (that leads the rice theme), HORTI-Tengeru, and Kilombero (KATRIN). Local

government institutions, specifically DAICOs, the private sector (seed companies, millers, and processors) and NGOs are also part of the project implementers to deliver on the

following objectives:

1. Introduce and promote improved and resilient varieties of food crops to farm

households in a manner that complements their on-going farm enterprises,

contributes to sustainable agricultural resource management, and offers nutritional

advantages and alternative market channels;

2. Disseminate GAPs along with the most promising new crop varieties suited to

widely representative agro-ecological zones and market proximity;

3. Protect land and water resources and foster agricultural biodiversity through the

introduction of soil and water management practices;

4. Increase food security and improve household nutrition among the most vulnerable

households and their members, especially women and children, by introducing locally

adapted and nutrient-rich vegetables;

5. Introduce and promote postharvest management technologies for maize, rice,

legumes, and selected vegetable crops to reduce losses and bring quality up to

market standards; and

6. Offer and expand capacity building services to members of grassroots farmers’

associations, platform partners, and development institutions in the scaling process,

paying particular attention to the special opportunities available to women farmers as

technical and nutritional innovators and resource managers.

The project is currently being implemented in six regions in Tanzania, Manyara, Dodoma,

Morogoro, Iringa, Mbeya, and Songwe, all in the FtF’s ZoI (Fig. 1).

9

Figure 1: Project locations

All project activities contribute to the Development Objective (DO2) of the USAID

Tanzania Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS): inclusive of broad-based

economic growth sustained. This is the last year of the project phase and we plan to achieve

the Life of Project (LoP) targets of 58,000 ha under improved technologies, 47,000

households benefiting from the project interventions, 47,200 beneficiaries trained, and 200

organizations benefiting from our project activities.

2.2 Implementation status and planned activities

2.2.1 Maize/legume technologies and management practices

Improved maize and legume varieties were promoted in 137 villages across seven districts

(Table 1). 200 mother demonstration sites were established. Figure 2 shows the locations of

the maize/legume activities.

10

Table 1: Maize/legume demonstration activities established in the different districts in

2016/2017.

District Maize/legume seeds Fertilizers Established

demonstration sites

Varieties Types Mother Baby

Mvomero DK 8031, NATA H 104,

STUKA M1, MERU HB

513,

Beans (Uyole Njano and

Lyamungo 90)

Soybean (Uyole Line 2)

Yara Mila Cereal, DAP,

Urea, Yara Vera Amidas

30 125

Kilosa

NATA H 104, NATA H

105, MERU HB 513,

STUKA MI

Minjingu NAFAKA Plus,

Minjingu top dressing, DAP,

Yara Mila Cereal

10 400

Kilolo

MERU HB 513, Lubango

Hybrid, KH 500- 43A,

MAMS 913, TZH 538

Yara tobacco, Yara mila

cereal, DAP, Nafaka Plus

38 190

Kongwa &

Kiteto

NATA H 104, NATA H

105, MERU HB 513,

MERU HB 515, MERU IR

621

Minjingu NAFAKA lus,

Minjingu top dressing, DAP,

Yara Mila Cereal

26 390

Mbozi

SC 719, KITALE 614,

UH6303 and Lubango

Hybrid

Yara Mila cereal, DAP, Yara

Bela Sulfan, UREA and

Amidas

30 200

Babati

MERU HB 513, MERU HB

515

Beans (Uyole Njano and

Lyamungo 90

Soybean (Uyole Line 8)

Nafaka Plus, Minjingu top

dressing

14 98

Total 200 1,558

11

Figure 2: Location of maize/legume activities.

In addition to improved crop varieties, GAPs were demonstrated in all villages. These

included timely activity in planting, weed management, fertilizer application, and thinning to

maintain the recommended plant population. For natural resource management, legumes

(cowpea in Kilosa, soybean and bean in Kilolo, Mbozi, and Mvomero districts) were planted

either as an intercrop or in rotation with maize to provide the advantages of adding

nitrogen to the soil through nitrogen fixation. Tied ridges were also promoted in semi-arid locations (Kongwa and Kiteto districts) to demonstrate an option for soil and water

conservation. As a result of the maize activities, 134 village and district agricultural

extension staff (110 male, 24 female), and 35,947 farmers (21,666 male, 14281 female) were

trained.

Farmer training in management of vegetable

nurseries in Ihombe village, Mbeya rural

District. Photo credit: Hassan

Mndiga/WorldVeg.

Training for Government extension staff to in

Kongwa District. Photo credit: Haroon

Sseguya/IITA.

12

Yields of maize varied, depending on variety, practices promoted, and agroecology. In Babati

District, performance of three maize varieties (DK, Kitale, and TMV (a local check) under

different similar management regimes for proper fertilizer use (farmer practices, DAP, and

Minjingu fertilizer) clearly indicated that the fertilizers performed better than farmer

practices (Fig. 3) – farmer practices involve the use of 50 kg of fertilizer/acre (not following

the recommended amounts). It is also noteworthy that some improved varieties performed

well, giving good yields even under farmers’ practices.

Figure 3: Mean maize yield from 11 demonstration sites in Babati District.

With DK8031, 27% more yield was realized with DAP and 57% more with Minjingu

fertilizers. Similarly, increases of 47-112% for Kitale H04 and 62-95% for TMVI were

realized. At the farmers’ sites, fertilizer application increased maize yields by 10-126% (Fig.

4). Clearly, yields are improved even in farmers’ practices due to the use of the same

improved varieties and better plant spacing as opposed to previous seasons.

Figure 4: Yield of improved maize varieties promoted in Babati District in farmers’ field,

13

2017 (Data from 212 farmer fields. FP=farmers’ practice, IP=improved practice)

In Kongwa District, a combination of improved varieties, soil and water management, and

use of fertilizer was promoted. Data from farmers’ fields indicate that due to water stress,

yields from fields with local practices and farmers’ practices were as low as 0.2 t/ha. Table 2

and Figure 5 show the yields of different varieties under different regimes which ranged

between 2.1 and 3.7 t/ha. Similar trends of better results with improved varieties combined

with GAPS compared to farmers’ practices and local varieties were registered in all the

other project districts.

Table 2: Maize grain yield in Kongwa District from farmers’ (baby demonstration) plots

during 2016/2017 cropping season.

Practice Yield for improved variety (t/ha)

MERU

HB513

MERU

HB515

NATA

H105

NATA

H104

MERU

IR621

Conventional tillage+ 20 kg

P/ha (CTF) 2.7 2.9 3.0 2.5 2.1

Tied Ridging+ 20 kg P/ha kg/ha (TRF)

3.0 3.9 3.1 2.7 3.8

Figure 5: Maize grain yield as influenced by tillage, fertilizer and

varieties in Kongwa District during 2016/2017 cropping season.

To enhance access to quality legume seeds for planting, a team of Africa RISING, NAFAKA, and TOSCI embarked on quality declared seed production, with activities focusing on the

selection and training of farmers for seed production, field establishment, and regular

inspection – 77 farmers were involved, planting 81 acres of legumes as indicated in Table 3.

14

Table 3: Summary of QDS seed production by the project.

Type of crop District Number of farmers

trained and

supported

Number of

acres

Soybean -Uyole Soya 2 Kilolo 17 16

Common bean-Uyole

Njano

Soybean-Uyole soya 2

Iringa Rural

15

5

18

7

Common bean-Uyole

Njano

Mufindi 20 20

Common bean-Uyole

Njano

Mbozi 20 20

A QDS rice farmer in Kilombero District inspecting his rice crop.

Photo credit: Filbert Mzee/ACDI VOCA.

Government of Tanzania officials (Tanzania Official Seed

Certification Institute - TOSCI) inspecting one of the project QDS

plots in Mbozi District. Photo credit: Filbert Mzee/ACDI VOCA.

15

2.2.2 Rice technologies and management practices

i. Demonstration sites and training activities

Fifty-seven mother demonstration plots were established for improved rice varieties,

fertilizers, and salt-affected paddy soil management (21 in Kilombero and ten each in

Mbarali, Iringa rural and Mvomero districts). Of these, six were established for purposes of

management of salt-affected soils (SAS), one for managing calcareous soils, and the rest (44)

were variety-fertilizer (VarFer) demonstrations. In addition, three mother-demonstrations

for alternate wet and dry (AWD) water management were established in three locations in

Kilombero District, and another three focusing on rice-legume relay cropping were

established (two in Kilombero District and one in Mvomero). Additional 842 baby

demonstration sites were established (the original plan was to establish 1250 but some were

abandoned due to drought. especially in Mbarali District). Table 4 provides a summary of

the demonstration sites established, whereas Figure 6 shows the locations for the sites.

Table 4: Rice demonstration sites established in the four project districts.

District Number of

villages

Irrigation scheme(s) Type of technology

Mbarali

10 Gwiri, Luanda Majenje,

Bethania, Ipatagwa, and Uturo

2 for Salt affected soils (SAS)

8 Variety-fertilizer (VarFer)

Iringa Rural

10 Nyamahana, Idodi, Magozi,

and Luganga

3 SAS and 7 VarFer

Kilombero

21 Signali, Mkula, and Msolwa

Ujamaa

2 AWD, 2 rice-legume relay, 1

calcaric soil management, and

21 VarFer

Mvomero 10 Dakawa, Mkindo, Mbogo, and

Kigugu

1 calcaric, 1 rice-legume relay

and 10 VarFer

Figure 6: Location of rice activities.

16

The project trained 51 Government agricultural extension staff, 3 NAFAKA staff (2 male, 1

female), and 22,274 farmers (13,262 male, 9,012 female), using the demonstration sites. The

training, directed to both theory and practice, focused on variety selection and GAPs for

increasing rice productivity. The GAPs included bunding and leveling of rice fields for proper

water management, line planting to maintain the recommended plant population, timely

management of weeds, diseases, and insect pests, timely soil fertility management by

optimizing the use of NPK-supplying fertilizers, proper irrigation and drainage of fields for

managing soil salts, timely harvesting, proper drying and proper storage of rice grain. Prior

to practical training, technology protocols were developed that elaborated, step by step, the

implementation of all the identified technologies and were used as guides to establishing the

demonstration plots. Practical training was enhanced by fully engaging the stakeholders in

the establishment and daily management of the mother demonstration plots up to

harvesting stage. To enhance access to quality rice seeds, support to QDS seed production

was provided for 67 farmers (26 male, 41 female) in Kilombero and Mvomero districts.

ii. Yield of improved and local (traditional) rice varieties with and without GAPs in normal paddy soil environments

The improved varieties (Komboka and TXD 306) performed better than the traditional

ones with or without GAPs (with farmers’ practice, FP). With an average of 6.8 t/ha with

GAPs and 5.4 t/ha without GAPs, Komboka variety performed best, followed by TXD 306

(6.6 t/ha with GAPs and 5.1 t/ha without GAPs) (Fig.7). The lowest yield (4.3 t/ha) was

obtained with traditional (unimproved) varieties under inadequate management (FP). This

would indicate that even with poor crop management farmers can still raise rice

productivity to some extent by adopting improved varieties. Conversely, it was noted that

yields of local varieties increased with GAPs, in some cases, yield was even higher than that

of improved varieties grown with FP. This implies that farmers could still improve yields of

their traditional varieties by applying GAPs but to achieve the goal of sustainable

intensification, a combination of improved varieties and GAPs is the best.

Figure 7: Rice grain yield for improved and local varieties under different agricultural

practices.

iii. Yield of salt tolerant rice varieties

As was the case in the previous year, two salt-tolerant varieties (SATO1 and SATO6) and

non-tolerant (check) varieties were planted in plots where salt-managing amendments, farm

yard manure (FYM) and gypsum were applied and in non-treated plots.

17

The yield of all rice varieties was higher in plots where gypsum and FYM had been applied

(i.e., with management) compared to non-treated (i.e., without management) plots (Fig. 8).

The highest grain yield (10.3 t/ha) was recorded on SATO6 followed by SATO 1 (10.2 t/ha)

and local/traditional varieties (6.0 t/ha). Moreover, even without salt management, SATO1

and SATO6 with over 6 t/ha performed better than local varieties with 5.1 t/ha.

Figure 8: Rice grain yield for salt tolerant and local varieties under different management

regimes.

The results indicate that farmers can significantly improve rice productivity in salt-affected

soils by planting salt-tolerant varieties while improving the characteristics of such soils by

amending them with a combination of gypsum and FYM.

2.2.3 Vegetable technologies and management practices

During 2016/17, vegetable activities were operational in Mbeya, Morogoro, and Iringa

regions, covering five Districts (Kilombero, Iringa rural, Kilolo, Mbeya rural, and Mbarali).

Activities were implemented in 43 villages: 6 in Kilombero, 9 in Iringa rural, 10 in Kilolo, 9 in

Mbeya rural, and 9 in Mbarali. A variety of vegetables were promoted, depending on

agroecology and community requirements, including tomato (Tengeru 2010), African

eggplant (DB 3 and Tengeru white), amaranth (Madiira I and II), African nightshade

(Nduruma), jute mallow (SUD 2), vegetable soybean (AGS 292), vegetable cowpea (Ex

Iseke), okra (TZ SMN 86), Ethiopian mustard (Rungwe and Arumeru), and pumpkin (GKK

174). In total, 44 nursery plots each with 12 different vegetable crops and 43 demonstration

plots were established (6,192 m2) in the five districts mentioned. Variety promotion goes

hand in hand with various activities as indicated in Table 5.

Table 5: Overview of vegetable activities in the different regions, districts, and villages in

2016/17.

District Villages Scope of activities conducted in

2016/17

Kilombero Lumemo, Mgudeni, Mwaya,

Mkula, Kining’ina, and Idete

Season-long production training and seed

kit distribution (sensitization, nursery

management, soil improvement, GAPs

including IPM, harvest and postharvest

techniques, organoleptic tests).

18

Iringa rural Mgera, Mlambalasi I and II,

Luganga, Mgama, Ndiwili,

Nyabula, Nyamahana,

Ugwachanya, and

Tungamalenga

Season-long production training and seed

kit distribution

Kilolo Ukumbi, Winome, Mbigili,

Kitumbuka, Igunda,

Nyanzwa, Ruaha,

Masukanzi, Ilawa, Itungi

Season-long production training and seed

kit distribution

Mbeya Rural Mwankenje, Izuo, Ihombe,

Sanje, Itimu, Iwanza,

Impomu, Santilya, Njelenje

Season-long production training and seed

kit distribution

Mbarali Manienga, Iheha, Mbuyuni,

Azimio Mapula, Uhambule,

Nsonyanga, Kibaoni,

Wimbamahango

Season-long production training and seed

kit distribution

Implementation of the activities was done by staff from Catholic Relief Service (CRS) and

Africare as scaling partners, two seed companies (Meru Agro Tech and Alfa Seed) for

improved seed dissemination, AtoZ Textiles for further research on small-scale screen

houses, and the public extension service as the main partner for scaling interventions at

village level. A total of 3,177 smallholder farmers were introduced to improved vegetable

varieties and production practices. In addition, 1,847 (46% male and 54% female) were

trained on nursery management practices, 1,931 (40% male and 60% female) were trained

on transplanting and demonstration plot preparation, 1,371 (47% male and 53% female)

were trained on GAPs with a focus on integrated pest management (IPM), and 1,296 (29%

male and 71% female) were trained on postharvest practices, received recipes, and

participated in a cooking show. Furthermore, 41 village/Government agricultural extension

officers and 61 progressive farmers participated in all training sessions.

2.2.4 Postharvest and aflatoxin management

As in previous years, to help address postharvest management constraints, the project team

trained Lead farmers and also conducted demonstrations on the postharvest handling of

maize (shelling, drying, storage, and processing). This activity focused on improving the skills

of smallholder farmers to reduce postharvest losses. Specifically, shelling, proper drying and

storage technologies were introduced via training and demonstration to farmers in 22

villages in five districts: Mbozi, Kilolo, Mvomero, Kilosa, Kongwa, and Kiteto. In these direct

trainings, the team reached 1398 farmers; 50.5% (706) were men and 49.5% (692) were

women, representing on average 64 farmers/village. In addition, in collaboration with

NAFAKA and Poly Machinery Co Ltd, (the commercial supplier of the maize shellers and

rice threshers) we conducted artisan training programs that involved participants from

districts/villages where postharvest training was conducted or planned. The training was

conducted to facilitate the availability of maintenance and repair personnel to service the

farmers and other users of the technology. The target was to train 20 artisans across the

project districts. We exceeded this target by training 45 artisans (1 female, 44 male) in 8

districts: Mbozi (6), Mbarali (4), Kilolo (1), Iringa Rural (9), Kilosa (4), Mvomero (6), Kongwa

(6) and Kiteto (7). This success was attributed to positive interest by young people. In fact,

33 out of the 45 artisans expressed an interest in selling the shellers/threshers or spare

parts.

19

Local artisans participating on training focusing on maintenance of rice

thresher machine in Morogoro. Photo credit: Audifas Gaspar/IITA.

Management of aflatoxins in maize was another key activity that the project introduced in

the 2016/17 season. We started off by establishing demonstration sites for testing the

efficacy of a Tanzania-specific product (AflasafeTM TZ01 and AflasafeTM TZ02) Kongwa,

Kilosa, and Kiteto. In each district, 20 smallholder farms were treated with AflasafeTM with

20 as control. These sites were supposed to act as learning sites for extension staff and

farmers. However, we realized that the AflasafeTM product had not been approved for

Tanzania, and this affected our efforts to take it scale. Thus, efforts were directed to briefing

stakeholders on aflatoxin management as well as the production of materials for use in

raising awareness in communities about aflatoxin as we await approval of the product for

scaling. In total 98 Government extension staff and 38media staff people were sensitized. A

brochure for use in the management of aflatoxins has also been developed for future use.

Left, training of extension staff in Kongwa/Kiteto districts on management of aflatoxins in maize

and legumes. Right, an aflatoxin awareness creation brochure developed and disseminated by the

project team. Photo credit: Elirehema Swai/ARI Hombolo.

2.2.5 Field days and related events

As a means of sharing project results with participating farmers and other stakeholders, field

days were organized in several project districts by the maize and rice teams (Table 6). Over

20

4,000 people participated in the field days. In all cases, local government staff, research staff

from agricultural research institutes, input dealers, and the media attended as a sign of

support for the project activities and a strategy for scaling and sustainability.

Table 6: Field day participants for the maize, aflatoxin management and rice activities.

Enterprise District Participants

Male Female Total

Maize Mbozi 385 500 885

Kongwa 287 263 550

Kiteto 196 278 474

Kilolo 326 278 604

Mvomero 335 317 652

Sub total 1,529 1,636 3,165

Rice Kilombero 49 48 97

Mbarali 35 40 75

Iringa rural 40 34 74

Mvomero 38 45 83

Subtotal 162 167 329

Aflatoxin management Kongwa 310 250 560

TOTAL 2,001 2,053 4,054

Songwe Regional Commissioner with other guests

pay attention to a mechanical maize sheller

during Nane Nane Agricultural show in Mbeya.

Photo credit: Audifas Gaspar/IITA.

Enthusiastic visitors learn how to use diesel-

powered maize shelling machine in Mbeya

show ground. The demonstration is led by two

farmers (Mr. Oscar Jumapili [also a local

atisan] and Mrs. Magdalena Haule Mbwaga in

grey T-shirts) of Itumpi village, Mbozi District,

who were previously trained by Africa RISING,

and have had hands-on experience using the

technology since 2016. Photo credit: Audifas

Gaspar/IITA.

Africa RISING participated with NAFAKA in the Nane Nane activities in Mbeya from 1 to 8

August 2017 to showcase improved postharvest technologies for better nutrition and food

losses reduction. Africa-RISING also participated in Nane Nane activities in Arusha and Lindi

regions. A total of 1,758 participants (Mbeya 350; Arusha 879 [583 men, 296 women]; Lindi

529 [330 men, 199] women) visited and interacted with the technologies. These were

improved mechanical shelling, improved drying, and hermetic bag storage of cereals and

legumes. In Mbeya, selected farmers demonstrated use of the technologies, and shared their

experiences with visitors at our stands.

21

They were previously trained by Africa RISING, and have had hands-on experience in using

the technologies since 2016.

2.2.6 Problems and challenges

i. Delayed onset of rains in most locations in Tanzania was a challenge at the beginning

of the planting season. As a result, many farmers who had planted in Babati, Mbarali,

Kongwa, Kilolo and Kiteto districts lost their crops owing to extreme drought. Some

farmers were advised to replant after resumption of rains and start afresh as a result

of total crop failure but in some locations, such as Mbarali, Kongwa and Kiteto

districts, many farmers could not easily recover from the disturbances.

Maize crop in Babati District affected by water stress. Photo credit: Haroon

Sseguya/IITA.

ii. Crop pests, notably the fall armyworm, have been a challenge in all districts,

devastating maize and rice crops and leading to serious losses. Farmers were trained

on the proper management of the pests using pesticides.

iii. In Mbarali, Mvomero and Kilolo districts, we noticed that some farmers expected

financial compensation for their participation in the training activities. This was due

to interventions in this project’s locations by other (different) projects whose staff

paid farmers for their participation in activities. The project team members made

attempts to explain to all participants that they would not be paid (i.e., they could

receive only a seed kit to stimulate their interest in the future use of improved

technologies). The district authorities also made efforts to emphasize the issue of

non-payment for participation in training activities aimed at development.

iv. Availability of spare parts was a limitation in various project locations where the

maize shelling machines were introduced and promoted. During the planning of

artisan training discussions were held with the machine supplier to arrange for the

sale of spare parts by appointed dealers in the project districts. This would require

establishing a rural retailer network that would make possible the supply of spare

parts in proximity to the villages and enable easy and quick access for more

realization of the benefits of the technologies. There is, however, still need for

targeted approaches to accelerate the establishment of rural spare part dealerships.

22

A starting point would be to have a dealership at each district, which can then with

time cascade toward or village level.

v. The demand for PICs (storage) bags seems to have increased more rapidly than the

ability of the major manufacturers to establish retail networks to sell the bags in the

villages. The effort made in ameliorating this situation was the establishment of a

partnership with A to Z Textile Mills Ltd, one of the bag manufacturers, to join the

Postharvest Team in the testing of the bags with farmers and training sessions in

Babati District (Seloto, Sabilo, and Long villages). The approach was aimed at making

it possible for the company to have a direct link to the various locations and the

farmers for ease of arranging a retail network for the bags.

vi. Delays by the Government of Tanzania in getting approval and registration of the

aflasafe product for aflatoxin management have stifled efforts to take the product to

scale despite the interest it has aroused among farmers.

2.2.7 Planned activities

The key planned activities for next quarter include the following:

i. Finalization of work plans for the 2017/18 fiscal year

ii. Visit to project sites for needs assessment and analysis

iii. Design of tools and methodology for Collaborative Learning and Adaptation (CLA)

question

iv. Site selection and procurement of inputs for demonstration/training sites

v. Training of extension staff and Lead farmers

vi. Yield data processing.

23

3. INTEGRATION OF CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

AND USAID FORWARD PRIORITIES

3.1 Gender equality and women’s empowerment

The project team experienced the almost equal participation of male and female farmers in

all training activities, except in a few cases, such as participation in vegetable activities

(women dominating) and aflatoxin management activities (men dominating). Generally,

emphasis was placed on ensuring a balance among the youth, male, and female farmers when

selecting Lead farmers, VBAAs, and hosts of demonstration sites. During training, emphasis

was also placed on having equal participation of the youth, male, and female farmers in the

sessions where everyone was encouraged to take part. Scheduling of sessions was also done

is such a way that all interested community members could take part.

We have also noted some unique community arrangements which encourage female

participation. For instance, for vegetable activities, women’s participation in Mbarali and Mbeya rural was over 60%, on average. The main reason for the high participation of female

farmers in training activities was the previous training activities of the CRS in those villages.

CRS conducted training on nutrition with a strong focus on women with children aged

under five years in the location. Female participation in the pilot villages located in

Kilombero District was even 75%, on average, for vegetable activities. The reason for such a

high participation of female farmers in the Kilombero pilot villages lies in the fact that the

project team worked mainly with the ‘serving and internal lending community’ (SILC) groups

that were trained by CRS and CARITAS. Those groups are self-help groups facilitating

economic activities of female and male farmers in villages. However, in general the project

team aimed at having an equal participation of male and female farmers in the training

groups and encouraged both men and women equally to participate in the training.

3.2 Youth engagement

The project has taken initiatives to support youth engagement. In the 2015/16 project year,

we piloted the approach of identifying young people in Msufini village, Mvomero District (2

male, 2 female), for maize/legume activities. They received training on pest and disease

management at Ilonga Agricultural Training Institute, Kilosa District. These young people

were actively engaged in providing services in the neighboring villages. In addition, members

of two youth groups in Mvomero District, Umoja ni Ushindi (20 members, Hoza village) and

Vijana-Kwadoli (25 members, Kwadoli village) were specifically supported and linked to a

soybean value chain project (Soya ni Pesa), led by CRS in Tanzania.

Although there was no deliberate focus on the youth for vegetable activities, we noticed

that in the majority of the pilot villages, young farmers under 25 years of age have adopted

vegetable varieties (e.g., tomato, African eggplant, African nightshade) that can fetch higher

prices than other vegetable types (e.g., amaranth and jute mallow). The young people seem

to understand vegetable production more as a business; whereas other farm households

also focus on the nutritional aspect of the vegetable crops grown in their home gardens.

24

3.3 Local capacity development

The project rolled out a strong collaboration with Government extension staff at district

and ward/village levels whereby the staff played a key role in providing training services at

the demonstrations to farmers. These extension staff received intensive training on GAPs

and data management by the project teams to enable them, in turn, to provide quality

services to farmers and other clientele. In addition, training support was provided to Village-

based Agricultural Agents (VBAAs), who not only complement GoT extension staff trainings

but play a key role as frontline actors in the rural agro-input dealer network. In addition, the

project worked with farmers’ groups and associations whose capacities were developed in

GAPs and related technical areas. We have developed communication and training materials

that will be used to build the capacities of local partners (see Fig. 9 for a snapshot of one of

the materials).

3.4 Integration and collaboration

By design, the Africa RISING-NAFAKA partnership was operational in 8 out of the 10 Africa

RISING-supported districts. In addition, we successfully sought collaboration with CRS and

Africare (Mwanzo Bora Nutrition Program) in Iringa Region on vegetables. The

collaboration with both NGOs was very successful and contributed to farmer training in

many aspects. CRS and Africare contributed largely to the monitoring of training activities in

the villages and introduced additional nutrition messages to the beneficiaries.

3.5 Sustainability

The close collaboration with district agricultural extension services and with NGOs

(CARITAS, Africare, and CRS) aims at linking the farmers to partners and development

initiatives that will provide support beyond the life of the project. In collaboration with the

NAFAKA project the team works with VBAAs and selected Lead farmers who manage

demonstration plots, provide access to inputs, and produce QDS for legumes and rice to

sustain the availability of varieties being taken to scale. Furthermore, the project team plans

to continue to link local input and other service providers (e.g., machinery, crop insurance)

with farmers and local extension staff to ensure continued accessibility of the technologies

after the project ends.

To enhance access to services by beneficiaries, the project launched an ICT platform, named

Mwanga (meaning “enlighten or light” in Swahili). Farmers, the research team, and extension

staff chose this name to denote that farmers needed information to provide guidance in

some of the decisions related to the technologies that the project is promoting.

The Mwanga Platform was launched on 20 December 2016. The current platform

membership is 2050 individuals within 13 communities in Babati District (Fig. 9) to provide

farmers with climate services, agronomic guidance, and market information as well as

information on project activities and when activities such as meetings would take place. The

platform runs from a dedicated android application provided by ECHO MOBILE with an

Airtel SSD private short code. We intend used this platform as a trigger for information

flow to numerous other farmers that we were not able to reach but to whom other

farmers spread this information by word of mouth.

25

Figure 9: Coverage of the Mwanga Platform

Figure 11: The Mwanga Platform connecting farmers to vital information to improve farm

decision making.

26

3.6 Environmental compliance

Following the project PERSUAP and other guidelines the project emphasizes the judicious

use of agro-inputs by promoting integrated soil fertility management without damaging the

natural resource base. In semi-arid locations, we encourage farmers to use improved in-situ

water conservation technologies such as tied ridges. Management technologies for soils on

steep slopes or those affected by high salinity and calcium content underlie the approach

used in this project. Given increasing problems of water availability for production, we

emphasize the importance of using organic manure and minimizing the use of water in rice

production. This is done by promoting the water-saving technologies and establishing bunds

around paddy plots in rice, among other methods.

3.7 Global climate change

Unpredictable weather especially rains affected progress of project activities in most

districts.

3.8 Policy and governance support

The project activities are in line with the Government policy of fostering agricultural

development. Consequently, the team got tremendous support from district and village local

governments in all areas where the project activities are implemented.

3.9 Private sector engagement, Public Private Partnerships (PPP), and

Global Development Alliance (GDA) collaboration

The project works directly with two agro-input/seed companies registered in Tanzania –

Meru Agro Seed Company, Alfa Seed Company and Aminata Agro Seed Company. Their

staff has been instrumental in providing guidance on seed-related matters as well as

participating in the rural agro-input network spearheaded by the NAFAKA project.

For vegetables, joint testing of small-scale screen houses by WorldVeg/HORTI Tengeru and

a private company (A to Z Textiles) is ongoing with farmer groups in five villages in Babati

District.

Through the Soya ni Pesa project implemented by CRS and a local NGO in Mvomero

District, Women and Poverty Alleviation in Tanzania (WOPATA), the project is working

with about 200 farmers in nine villages to provide an opportunity for obtaining a good

market for soybean.

For postharvest activities, there was successful engagement with Poly Machinery Ltd on

artisan training and opening sales points for machinery spare parts in project locations,

especially through the VBAA rural retailer network.

27

3.10 Science, technology, and innovation

The vegetables team developed and tested a screen house prototype together with A to Z

Textiles at the WorldVeg campus in Arusha. This trial aimed at testing the general

performance of the screen house compared to an open control plot. It further served to

screen six different WorldVeg tomato varieties (Tengeru 97, Tanya, Duluti, Kiboko,

Tengeru 2010, Meru) and to compare their performances inside and outside the screen

house. The experiment shows that the two indeterminate tomato varieties (Tengeru 2010

and Tengeru 97) performed best (Table 7). On average, the tomato varieties inside the

screen house had 52% higher yields than those outside.

Table 7: Comparison of yields inside and outside the screen house.

Varieties Marketable yield

screen house

Marketable yield

outside

Marketable yield

outside/inside

in kg in kg in %

Duluti 13,504 21,560 159.7

Kiboko 16,579 17,924 108.1

Meru 12,516 22,993 183.7

Tanya 14,564 21,571 148.1

Tengeru 2010 16,995 24,085 141.7

Tengeru 97 13,795 23,764 172.3

The same trials are currently conducted with eight screen houses in two villages in the

Babati District based on-farm trials. The latter trials will include a cost-benefit analysis to

determine whether the screen house prototype is an economically viable option for

smallholder farmers.

4. STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION AND

INVOLVEMENT

See sections 3.3 and 3.4.

5. MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES

Staffing for the current year remained the same except for one of the communications staff

who left the project for further studies at Wageningen University, The Netherlands.

28

6. MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND LEARNING

The PMP indicators are presented in Annex 1. The project team conducted two studies

whose results have been accepted for publication.

1. Muthoni, K.F, Guo, Z., Bekunda, M., Sseguya, H., Kizito, F., Baijukya, F. and Hoeschle-

Zeledon, I. (2017). Sustainable recommendation domains for scaling agricultural

technologies in Tanzania. Land Use Policy, 66: 34-48.

2. Sseguya, H., Bekunda, M., Muthoni, K.F., Fortunatus, F. and Masigo, J. Training

transfer for sustainable agricultural intensification in Tanzania: critical considerations

for scaling-up. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology for publication in 2018,

issue 4. (forthcoming)

Together with Africa RISING-NAFAKA team, we plan to conduct a study, as part of our

engagement in the USAID Collaborative Learning and Adaptation (CLA) activities, on two

emerging issues from our work in Tanzania:

1. To what extent does training at demos and provision of smallpacks influence

farmers’ decisions to buy inputs either from the established rural agrodealer

networks or other agro-input sources?

2. What are the drivers of farmers’ choices of technologies (e.g., maize varieties and

good agricultural practices) from among those promoted by the project?

In addition, the vegetables team conducted an impact study during January and February

2017 in the 2014/15 villages of the project (nine) in the Districts of Babati, Kiteto, and

Kongwa. A total of 403 quantitative interviews were conducted with male and female vegetable producers. Out of the 403 respondents, 200 were beneficiaries that participated

in the training activities and received a seed kit, while 203 neither received a seed kit nor

participated in the training (control). The beneficiaries and the control group surveyed were

all from the same villages and operated under the same environmental and market

conditions.

The survey also included a comparison of the yields of four different vegetable crops scaled

out by the project (tomato, African eggplant, amaranth, and African nightshade), as well as a

crop that had not been introduced as part of the seed kits, but was included in the practical

production training activities (Ethiopian mustard). The comparison did not include jute

mallow since this crop has been adopted by only a small number of beneficiaries and was

not cultivated by non-beneficiaries.

Figure 11 compares the yields of five different vegetable crops that were achieved by

beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. Beneficiaries had tomato yields that were on average

14% higher than those from non-beneficiaries. For African nightshade (56%) and for African

eggplant (103%) the yields from beneficiaries were significantly higher compared to those

realized by non-beneficiaries. There was no significant yield difference for amaranth.

29

Figure 11: Comparison of the yields obtained by beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries

(control) located in the nine pilot villages (yield data from 2016).

Figure 12 compares the yields of beneficiaries for specific crops in 2014 and 2016. Under

similar weather conditions in 2014 and 2016, as stated by all respondents in the

questionnaires, yields for all four crops scaled out by the project were significantly higher in

2016 than in 2014. Therefore, although we were not able to exclude all factors that may

have had an impact on farmers’ vegetable yields, the fact that the yields of beneficiaries were

significantly higher and that their yields were higher in 2016 compared to the last season

before the training activities were implemented lets us assume that the project intervention

had a positive effect on farmers’ yields.

Figure 12: Comparison of beneficiaries’ yields for specific crops in 2014 and 2016.

Figure 13 provides a comparison of the total production costs, total revenues, and their

gross margin in Tanzanian Shillings/ha. Except for African nightshade, the gross margins for all other vegetable crops were significantly higher for beneficiaries than for non-

beneficiaries. The gross margin of beneficiaries for tomato was even 26% higher than the

tomato gross margin of non-beneficiaries. For Ethiopian mustard, beneficiaries realized and

increased the gross margin but also had increased direct production costs. The increase of

30

costs results from significantly higher labor costs due to the possibility of harvesting several

times. Non-beneficiaries were able to harvest only once or twice from the same crop.

Figure 13: Comparison of total production costs, total revenues and gross margin of

beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries (Tanzanian Shillings/ha).

31

7. ANNEXES

7.1 Annex I: Performance against PMP indicators for Project Year III (2016/17)

Indicator / Disaggregation Target

2017 Qr1 (Oct-Dec 2016) Qr2 (Jan- Mar 2017) Qr3 (Apr – Jun 2017) Qr4 (Jul – Sept 2017)

With

NAFAKA

Africa

RISING

(AR) only

Total With

NAFAKA

AR

only Total

With

NAFAKA

AR

only Total

With

NAFAKA AR only Total

EG.3-1: (4.5.2-13) Number of

households benefiting directly

from USG interventions (RAA)

47,000 5,383 3,872 9,255 10,746 2,300 13,046 34,157 1,969 36,12

6 1,126 707 1,833

New/Continuing

New 39,392 651 996 1,647 10,746 1,608 12,354 28,774 1,969 30,743 - -

Continuing 7,608 4,732 2,876 7,608 - 692 692 5,383 - 5,383 1,126 707 1,833

Location

Rural 47,000 5,383 3,872 9,255 10,746 2,300 13,046 34,157 1,969 36,126 1,126 707 1,833

Urban/Peri-urban

EG.3.2-1: (4.5.2-7) Number of

individuals who have received

USG-supported short-term

agricultural sector productivity

or food security training (RAA)

(WOG)

47,200 1,152 1,374 2,526 15,437 3,285 18,722 40,203 2,161 42,36

4 1609 1,009 2,618

Type of Individual

Producers 47,000 1,024 1,341 2,365 15,352 3,285 18,637 40,184 1,969

42,15

3 1609 1,009 2,618

Male 23,500 509 667 1,176 8,462 1,477 9,939 20,259 1,299

21,55

8 795 265 1,060

32

Female 23,500 515 674 1,189 6,890 1,808 8,698 19,925 670

20,59

5 814 744 1,558

People in Government 160 122 33 155 40 - 40 19 192 211 - - -

Male 90 98 24 122 34 - 34 12 147 159 - - -

Female 70 24 9 33 6 - 6 7 45 52 - - -

People in private sector firms 40 6 - 6 45 - 45 - - - - - -

Male 20 5 5 44 - 44 - - - - - -

Female 20 1 1 1 - 1 - - - - - -

People in civil society - - - - - - -

Male - - - - - - - - -

Female - - - - - - - - -

EG.3.2-4: (4.5.2-11) Number of

for-profit private enterprises,

producers’ organizations, water

users’ associations, women's

groups, trade and business

associations, and community-

based organizations (CBOs)

receiving USG food security

related organizational

development assistance (RAA)

(WOG)

200 161 18 179 196 35 231 175 21 196 196 35 231

Type of organization

For-profit private enterprises 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3

Producers organizations 197 143 11 154 178 28 206 157 14 171 178 28 206

Water users’ associations 16 - 16 16 - 16 16 - 16 16 - 16

Women's groups

Trade and business

associations

33

Community-based

organizations (CBOs) 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

*EG.3.2-17: (4.5.2-5) Number of

farmers and others who have

applied improved technologies

or management practices with

USG assistance (RAA) (WOG)

47,000 43,304 8,201 51,505

*EG.3.2-18: (4.5.2-2) Number of

hectares of land under improved

technologies or management

practices with USG assistance

(RAA) (WOG)

58,000 83,290.4 10,684.7 93,975

35

7.2 Annex II: Success stories

Tanzania farmers embrace vegetable farming to access more high-value

markets and improve nutrition

Vitalis Joseph a vegetable farmer from Bermi in Babati District, Tanzania watering his

Ethiopian mustard vegetables. He is among the smallholder farmers who have adopted elite

vegetable varieties promoted by the Africa RISING project. Photo credit: Inviolate

Dominick/WorldVeg.

Persistent global hunger and undernutrition have underscored the need for urgent

action towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that aim to end

all forms of malnutrition and double the agricultural productivity and incomes of

small-scale food producers by 2030. In sub-Saharan Africa, lack of dietary diversity is

a key causal factor of malnutrition since a big part of the population consume mainly

staples as their main food, which are high in carbohydrates, but low in

micronutrients and vitamins. To address this dietary diversity and incomes gap,

encouraging farmers to grow elite varieties of traditional African and global

vegetables can make an important contribution to nutritional security and extend the

income generation opportunities for smallholders as is already being illustrated by

interventions by the Africa RISING project among farmers in Tanzania.

Since 2013, the project has targeted over 6,000 smallholder farmers in seven

districts across Tanzania to promote vegetable farming as a complementary

agricultural activity in the largely maize-dominated farming systems. Through capacity

building for farmers about vegetable farming (from raising seedlings to marketing)

and provision of seeds through a cascading scaling model; results are beginning to

36

show that many farmers are turning to farming of the leafy greens. Vegetable farming

has become a viable agri-business alternative with great potential for income

generation.

Vitalis Joseph, a 32-year-old from Bermi Village in Babati District in the northeast

Tanzania is one such farmer. His first interaction with the Africa RISING project staff

was in 2013 when he had attended a meeting in his village that was convened by

representatives from the World Vegetable Center. At the meeting, the team

explained to the farmers how they could improve their nutrition and also earn

additional income for their families through vegetable production. Joseph had been

growing vegetables marginally before but had never considered it something that

could earn him significant income.

Soon after, he started growing and selling tomatoes, Ethiopian mustard and

amaranth. He notes that there is always a high market demand for the elite varieties

he was introduced to by the project. Out of the proceeds from vegetable farming, he has constructed a permanent house for his family.

'My friends and neighbours will tell you that I am where I am now because of farming

and selling these vegetables. I come from a very poor background and others even

wonder how I have managed to achieve this,' says Joseph with a tinge of emotion.

Yet Joseph's story is not an isolated one of the still unfolding success of Africa

RISING’s vegetable technology interventions towards fighting poverty and

malnutrition.

Similar stories of success from vegetable farming have been documented from both

young and old farmers.

Monica Paschal, 48-year-old farmer and a mother of five from Babati 'From my ¾ hectares of land where I grow tomatoes and other vegetables while also keeping chicken, I now earn nearly TShs 6 million in a season (approx. USD 2,500). In the old system, where I grew maize intercropped with pigeon pea I would earn just about TShs 2 million,' says Monica Paschal (read her story on this link: https://spark.adobe.com/page/Fs2TS5quyLJJ0/).

37

Haasan Saidi, 20 year-old farmer from Maweni Village, Babati 'This is now the third time that I have produced my own vegetable seeds from the WorldVeg varieties. Out of the six varieties they introduced to my village, I have chosen tomato (Tengeru 2010), African eggplant (DB3), and African nightshade (Nduruma). These are the best I have ever grown. I don’t need any other crops. I was able to harvest 20 bags of African nightshade, where I previously produced only 1.5 bags. My tomato yields have doubled, and I am still harvesting African eggplant from the seed that I sowed half a year ago! With these new varieties that are in high demand in the market, my income has increased by more than TShs 400,000 per season (USD 190),' explains Haasan Saidi, who lives in Maweni Village, about 25 km east of Babati town (read his story on this link: https://africa-rising.net/2016/05/30/no-small-change/).

The combined use of healthy seedlings with good agronomic practices has increased

tomato production in the majority of the Africa RISING vegetable activity

intervention sites by 3.4 times and of African eggplant and Amaranth by 2.8 times

each. This turned out to be more of an economic venture and generated extra

interest in identifying methodologies for better storing the increased quantities produced and accessing viable markets. Considering that typical smallholder farming

households do not only focus on one activity like vegetable farming, livestock

nutritionists involved in the project have started using the non-edible components of

the vegetable plants as feed components in the poultry rations as highlighted in

Monica Paschal’s story.

'Data from the project sites in Babati, Kongwa and Kiteto districts show that from

2014 to 2016, farmers increased tomato production, on average, from 10.7 to 17.2

tonnes per hectare, African eggplant production from 8 to 14.4 tonnes per hectare,

and amaranth production from 8.6 to 12.2 tonness per hectare following community

sensitization, use of quality elite vegetable variety seeds and training in healthy

seedling production,' explained Justus Ochieng, a WorldVeg scientist.

Besides, a survey conducted in villages hosting demonstration sites in Babati District

shows that 32% of the farmers have adopted elite seeds and healthy seedlings while

59% have started using inorganic fertilizers in producing vegetables. Many farmers

(67%) are following other good agronomic practices, mainly mulching, timely

38

weeding and planting, and manure use in their farms in order to ensure healthy

growth of vegetables.

Ochieng adds that linking of farmers to high value markets has enabled several of

them to sell their produce at higher prices. Other income was generated from selling

healthy seedlings to neighbouring farmers through nurseries that they had set-up as a

result of the increasing demand. These approaches have been particularly successful

in the Africa RISING research villages of Matufa, Bermi, Galapo, Seloto and

Shaurimoyo in Babati District where farmers utilize collective marketing of

vegetables to access markets and reduce transaction costs.

Most farmers in the project have realized higher incomes from all the crops

(amaranth, nightshade, African eggplant and tomato) planted which reflects the

higher yields that they were able to achieve. Many of them also claim to have

increased their household consumption of vegetables since the project started.

Increases in income are clearly important for reducing malnutrition. Greater incomes

at the household level allow families to spend more on food, clean water, hygiene

and preventive and curative healthcare. It gives families access to a more diversified

diet and better childcare arrangements. At the community level, greater income will

eventually lead to better access to and higher quality healthcare and diversified diets,

improved water and sanitation systems, and better access to information.

Note: The data used in this story was generated from the Africa RISING ESA and the

Africa RISING-NAFAKA projects. Implementation of both vegetable research and scaling

activities is led by the World Vegetable Center.

Writers and contributors: Jonathan Odhong, Justus Ochieng, Andreas Gramzow,

Inviolate Mosha and Gloriana Ndibalema.

39

Tanzania Minister of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries praises Africa

RISING-NAFAKA project scaling model in enhancing research - extension

linkages

Hon Dr Charles Tizeba, Tanzania’s Minister for Agriculture Livestock and Fisheries (far left)

when he visited the Africa RISING Project farmer demonstration site at Kigugu Irrigation

Scheme in Mvomero District. He is flanked by (from left to right): Dr Firmin Mizambwa,

Chief Executive Officer of Agricultural Seed Agency; Dr Kissa Kajigili Director of Agricultural

Extension, Dr Sophia Kashenge, Africa RISING-NAFAKA Project Rice Team Leader; Ms

Neema Mkanga Extension Officer, Kigugu Village, and Dr Kebwe Stephen Kebwe, Regional

Commissioner Morogoro.

The Africa RISING-NAFAKA project’s model for scaling and disseminating improved

technologies has been lauded as “exemplary” and the kind of approach needed to

ensure sustainability of improved agricultural interventions for farmers by Tanzania’s

Minister of Agriculture Livestock and Fisheries, Hon Dr Charles Tizeba.

The Minister made the remarks during his visit to the Africa RISING-NAFAKA

Project demonstration site at Kigugu Irrigation scheme in Mvomero District on 28

June 2017. He further lauded the model for being a demand-driven one that ensures

involvement of various stakeholders and encouraged other interventions working at

the local level with extension officers and farmers to consider adopting the same

approach.

“I urge all researchers and other stakeholders in agriculture to ensure that they

provide extensive training to these extension officers for sustainability of agricultural

interventions,” said Hon Tizeba after he was impressed by the depth of knowledge

40

exhibited by the Village Agricultural Extension Officers (VAEOs) who responded to

the technical questions he asked during the visit.

The Africa RISING-NAFAKA project approach involves VAEOs as an integral part of

the process in promoting improved rice production technologies among farmers.

The scaling model involves introduction of the technologies in the communities using

mother‒baby‒grandbaby demonstration sites which serve as training/learning sites for extension staff and farmers. Extension staff and lead farmers undergo season-long

training using the sites and they then train other farmers in a cascading mode,

backstopped by staff from participating research and development institutions (Fig.

1). Key principles that guide the process to make it successful include: international

research institutions working with the national research institutions at all sites; close

linkage and working with development partners, both government and non-

government/private, that may be implementing activities in and around the project

site; leveraging resources among participating institutions; close collaboration with

District Agricultural Extension Officers, Ward Agricultural Extension Officers, and

Village Agricultural Extension Officers; use of Geographical Information Systems for

better targeting of interventions; and ensuring regular communication via different

modes (WhatsApp groups, reports, meetings) among stakeholders—farmers, implementing partners, government, and donors.

Figure 1. The research and development model for innovation delivery and

scaling as applied by the Africa RISING-NAFAKA Project for rice

technologies.

Through the USAID-funded Africa RISING-NAFAKA Project, Dakawa Agricultural

Research Institute (ARI- Dakawa) is leading implementation of activities to improve

rice productivity in Tanzania’s Mvomero, Kilombero, Iringa Rural, and Mbarali

districts. The project’s aims are three-fold: Ensuring that at least 47,000 smallholder

farm households in rural Tanzania can access technologies to diversify and increase

41

their food supply and income sources, and improve the quality of degrading

smallholder cropland; expanding the area under improved crop production

technologies by at least 58,000 hectares; and increasing the yields of both maize and

rice by 50% as a result of the technologies being applied.

42

Changing tack in extension so technologies tick the right boxes for

farmers to take root

A self-organized field day led by the extension agents underway in Babati District.

Photo credit: Job Kihara/CIAT

One of the major paradoxes confounding actors in agricultural research and

development today is: Why, in several instances, don’t smallholder farmers adopt

agricultural innovations and technologies that have been validated through rigorous

scientific processes despite their (obvious) ability to improve livelihoods? While

various arguments have been made on a technology-by-technology basis, one aspect

that is always a starting point has always been: How the technologies were

introduced to the farmers (the extension process).

For the past six years, scientists drawn from different national and international

research centers, initially working under the USAID-funded Africa RISING program

and later under the Africa RISING-NAFAKA project, have been engaged in

agricultural research and scaling activities (through participatory approaches) with

the goal of improving the livelihoods of thousands of smallholder farmers in 10

districts of Tanzania. While the initial focus of the program (and the scientists) was

predominantly on validating the technologies through participatory research with

farmers, the team is now working with concerted efforts to take the technologies to

scale, targeting thousands of farmers beyond the communities where the validation

was done. This greater expectation and focus is changing how the project team is

going about the business of agricultural extension.

43

Babati District, the epicenter of change

During July 2017, Babati District (one of the 10 Africa RISING focus districts in

Tanzania) has been a beehive of activity. Extension personnel from the district, ward,

and village levels have been holding field days aimed at sharing experiences and

lessons learned from project activities. Beyond the pomp and fanfare associated with

the events, valuable messages about the technologies and practices are being shared

in a practical and user-friendly manner, more importantly, through the most

appropriate mediums—the extension staff. Through them, technical messages about

improved technologies are almost naturally simplified owing to their ability to “speak

the farmers’ language”.

This wasn’t always how Africa RISING farmer field days were organized. Most of the

field days were largely researcher-led. So, what occasioned the change in approach

from researcher-led field days to extension/village/self-organized field days?

“We realized that researchers can only conduct a few field days and reach a small number of farmers. On the other hand, district, ward, and village extension agents

operate and are present in all the villages. We didn’t have any facilitation in the past

to be able to implement demos and field days in our villages, but now once the

scientists have helped us and the farmers to set-up demonstration plots where these

improved technologies can be observed, we then take-over to educate our farmers

through self-organized field days,” explains Jonas Massam, the acting District

Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock Cooperatives Officer for Babati.

Minimal support, maximum impact

With minimal support from the scientists, the extension agents conducted field days

in 13 villages attracting between 35 and 165 farmers at each event. To ensure that

they are not spread too thinly when managing a large number of farmers during a

field day, the extension agents have also established a mechanism whereby their

colleagues from neighboring villages come to help when many farmers are expected.

“The team spirit exhibited by the extension agents is amazing. This kind of effort at

the grassroots can quickly transform agriculture for the better. The project will

continue to provide basic inputs for many more extension personnel to implement

demos especially in locations where farmers normally conduct village meetings. I

think this will be a good way of utilizing the existing network and local know-how by

the extension personnel for the benefit of farmers,” notes Dr Job Kihara, a Senior

Scientist with CIAT and an agronomist for the project.

“I think our work over the past six years is paying off in a big way. It is good to

persist with this capacity-building effort for extension staff. We have trained them on

technology evaluation and participatory economic analysis and it is encouraging to

see them now go out on their own and work with farmers during the field days,”

adds Dr Stephen Lyimo, a Senior Scientist at Selian Agricultural Research Institute

and one of the implementing partners of the Africa RISING program.

Consistency in the quality of messaging

Ensuring consistency in the quality of messages and information transmitted from

researchers to extension personnel and farmers, and ensuring feedback among

actors is key for this approach to be effective. First, the extension workers are

44

trained by the scientists on the content and presentation of the messages during the

cropping season. Second, the scientists attend the field days, not to lead, but rather

to back up the extension staff in the event that a technical question they cannot

handle comes up. Third, the extension staff are equipped with reference materials,

which already have standardized messages and information that should be passed to

the farmers. Topics farmers have been trained on during the cropping season and

seen demonstrated during the field days led by extension staff so far include: use of

improved crop varieties, use of fertilizers especially in fields located on sloping land,

appropriate management of farmyard manure, optimum spacing of plants, soil and

water conservation measures, and the realization of the economic benefits

associated with the promoted technologies.

Fred Kizito, a Senior Scientist with CIAT implementing activities under the Africa

RISING-NAFAKA project notes that; “This change of tack is a big deal for us. It is

the make or break—without the commitment of our local partners (extension staff),

we would not go far. The number of farmers we are reaching now with improved technologies and practices would not be possible and more importantly our impact

on the ground would be very limited”. This effort is being followed up with ICT

messages from the MWANGA platform to farmers on market opportunities for

their produce, to extension agents to conduct follow-up activities with, and to the

beneficiary farmers.

Gender-sensitive technology dissemination

Adopting a gender-sensitive technology dissemination approach is also a significant

aspect of change introduced in this enhancement of extension services by the Africa

RISING scientists. For example, a field day that lasts about 3 ̶̶ 6 hours is now done in two parts—the first one involves visiting field demos in separate groups of male and

female farmers and evaluating the performance of the technologies, with each group

noting key observations and lessons. This is followed by a still separate meeting

(women and men) involving scoring of the technologies, associated benefits,

profitability assessment, and a discussion on key messages for moving forward. This

is particularly critical because men’s and women’s roles, opportunities, and views of

technologies are socially constructed and vary across different societies. Having two

groups of men and women during the field days therefore helps to ensure that

voices of both groups are heard in technology dissemination and fewer gender-

biased technologies.

Beyond just getting new technologies into the hands of more farmers, this change in

approach to extension is also anticipated to lead to the generation of more gender-

sensitive technologies by scientists using the feedback from the two farmer groups,

enhanced capacity of extension service in remote villages, as well as a stronger

linkage and partnership between the international organizations working in Africa

RISING and the NAFAKA programs and the national programs and local partners.

–

www.feedthefuture.org

–

www.feedthefuture.org

www.feedthefuture.org